Newsletter Vol. 57

Moral Degeneration Felled the Mighty Roman Empire

Furthermore, a parent who says marriage is only for a man and a woman in the presence of a lesbian teacher could be convicted of “harassment,” as well as a student who insists people are born either male or female in the presence of a male teacher who wears women’s clothes.

The current education code’s definition of “sex,” which reads, “‘Sex’ means the biological condition or quality of being a male or female human being,” is eliminated. The new “gender” definition considers “a person’s gender identity and gender related appearance and behavior whether or not stereotypically associated with the person’s assigned sex at birth.”

AB394 promotes the same issues through state-funded publications, postings, curricula and handouts to students, parents and teachers, while AB14, which prohibits state funding for any program that does not support a range of alternative sexual practices, including state-funded social services run by churches.

Affected will be day cares, preschool or after-school programs, food and housing programs, senior services, anti-gang efforts, jobs programs and others.

There will soon be a flood of harassment-lawsuits – the insanity of “hate-crimes” – against anyone who holds traditional moral views. The dissolution of the true Church is in progress, as well as the elimination of G-d’s laws, laying the foundations for the coming One-World Order, championing a rule of lawlessness.

This time it were only “hellish” fires dubbed “witch” that ravaged California, indiscriminate of rich, middle class or poor. They were a powerful warning from the G-d of all the earth that the fate of Sodom and Gomorroah, once rich and flourishing cities at the shores of a plentiful Sea, may likewise befall California⁷. Neither famous, rich or migrant will escape. Yet those who have heeded God’s warnings to flee these cities and areas will survive.

Sodom and Gomorrah were judged. Shall America escape while committing far more outrageous abominations?⁸

Does this picture of a late pregnancy abortion shock you? In premeditated murder a fully formed human being is cut to pieces – lawfully! And if this abomination were not enough, aborted fetuses are now an indispensable commodity for medical research and a thriving cosmetics industry. The greed of the billion-dollar business has squelched all opposition to these liberal abortion laws.

Does G-d Who created the eyes not see? Does He Who created the ears not hear? Suddenly, in an instant, His judgments will descend. But because He is just, and loves mercy and righeousness, He does nothing without first revealing His secret [counsel] to His servants the prophets, who, not withstanding, are being slandered as “liars” and “religious extremists” and rejected as “doom sayers”.

But if this is not enough for G-d’s judgments, will the slave-trade fill up the divine cup of wrath?

Thousands upon thousands of women and girls are smuggled into the U.S. from Asia and elsewhere to be funneled into the sex trade, whose ferocious demand cannot be satisfied.⁹.

This human merchandise – imported or domestic – is paraded, inspected, treated like animals and sold as sex slaves.

Elie Honig, an assistant United States attorney, said women brought in illegally were pushed into prostitution to earn money “to pay back the tens of thousands of dollars that the brokers charged the women as quote, unquote, fees for bringing them into the United States.”

He told the jury (at a court case in Manhattan): “We are talking about a regional network of businesses throughout the Northeast United States and beyond involved in transporting and selling women.”

There is nothing benign about these activities. Upwards of 18,000 foreign nationals are believed to be trafficked into the U.S. each year. According to the State Department, 80 percent of trafficked people are women and children,¹⁰ an overwhelming majority of whom are trafficked for sexual purposes .

MENE, MENE, TEKEL AND PARSIN

Domestic and foreign policy collided here, the latter rendering the former as not being in American “interests” to take a stand against genocide. Might this open yet again a “window” into another Jewish holocaust, seeing it is not in America’s interest to upset the oil-rich nations by taking a firm stand against genocide?

What finally will tilt the balances toward G-d’s judgment without remedy is the American Administration’s plan to divide up G-d’s OWN land, Israel, and create on Judea and Ephraim (later called Samaria) – referred to as Westbank – a terror state. No prayer against this will succeed, for G-d already determined long ago to gather “multitudes, multitudes, into the valley of decision, to enter into judgment with them there,” in that valley south of the old city of Jerusalem¹¹. What the Lord had me warn and exhort you to pray about was that it would NOT BE THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA having any part in this dividing up of G-d’s own Land.

But as it turns out, the U.S. is having a leading role in this, with President George W. Bush DEMANDING that a Palestinian State be created upon Israel’s covenanted soil¹², and his Secretary of State, “Condy” Rice, is following hard behind her boss. Or is she the boss?

What happened to the man whom I had heard with my own ears at his first campaigning exclaim, from the heart, that it was high time for America to act as a true friend and ally of Israel? It was this heartfelt avowal, not part of a prewritten speech, which caused me to vote for him.

As it turned out, he won the first term not by human vote but by G-d’s election¹³.

When the Lord said that the season of mercy and grace would last only 3 years I feared for the President’s life, interpreting these warnings to have this meaning. Instead, what happened is that Bush has forsaken the true G-d and renounced his eternal life.

Was it not handsome, shy Saul, of the tribe of Benjamin, the smallest tribe in Israel, whom G-d elected first to be King over Israel? G-d loved Saul, yet eventually rejected him from being King over Israel. Why? Because Saul was moved by what men said and did, and not by faith and trust in G-d and His promises. Even though G-d had chosen Saul, he was small in his own eyes, and lacked faith¹⁴.

G-d loved George W. Bush – Governor of Texas of no impressive standing, son of the executive member of the Council of Foreign Relations and anti-Israel Bush Sr. – because he loved G-d at that time and had determined in his heart to do what is right in the sight of G-d.
.
But he soon faltered, as the powers hidden in the shadows came to bear upon him. It must have been after the 3rd year in office that he capitulated to the will of those who for decades have plotted, schemed and worked on the creation of a one-world government. Like Saul’s, his faith in G-d was too weak to withstand the onslaught. He has become their willing instrument, the President of the United States a “pawn” in the hands of the one-worlders.

Saul was G-d’s chosen instrument to wipe out the very memory of Amalek from under heaven. He was to spare none, whether infants or aged, nor even the cattle and sheep. But greedy men, skilled in manipulation, persuaded Saul not to carry out the gruesame task, but to spare the king, keep the leading elite for slaves, and some of the finest of cattle and sheep for “sacrifices” unto G-d¹⁵. It was a prophet, Samuel, who brought to Saul G-d’s word of condemnation and rejection from being King because of this tragic failure of carrying out the divine purpose. And Samuel slew all – the Amalekite king, the Amalekite elite, and all that fine livestock¹⁶.

What would today’s prophets, those on the speaker circuit who keep holding prophecy conferences, have done if they had known G-d’s true purpose for George W. Bush?

This American President was G-d’s chosen instrument to put an end to Israel’s present-day “Amalek”, the Palestinian entity. But like Saul he was turned by men of greed after power and great wealth, and influenced by his father (though he always denies this), his Vice-President Cheney, and by the “Fuck the Jews” James Baker, all of whom are members of CFR¹⁷ who champion a new world order¹⁸, the one world government¹⁹.

George W. Bush has joined Israel’s adversaries, and therewith also G-d’s. His “season of mercy and grace” (by association also America’s) was over after 3 years in office. It manifested straight away when he began the “tradition” of inviting leading Islamic clerics into the White House for their “high” holiday of Ramadan and have them say a prayer to Allah. He began courting the Saudis and the Palestinian Authority, decrying the “plight of the Palestinians”. He wholly defied G-d’s purpose for him, not realizing that by having G-d on his side he would succeed against all opposition. His outward appearance in recent photos discloses the change of the inner man: once there was light in him, now it is darkness.

George W. Bush is doubtlessly the most useful President the CFR has ever had. Already Clinton – himself a CFR member – had served them well with the underhanded upheavals of nations and the invasion of Afghanistan, with the U.S. coming to “save” and rescue, bringing “democratic freedom”²⁰.

“Divide and conquer” is the motto i²¹.

However, the American made democratic freedom has turned Afghanistan into the world’s most prolific opium producer, generating an enormous harvest of money – for whom?

Bush Jr. has served them even better with getting the American public to acquiesce to having their civil liberties removed in the wake of 9-11, to invade Iraq by duping the American people into believing this to be a “good” and “necessary” war fighting terrorism.

Action Without Vision Is A Nightmare

The White House, Congress, Pentagon and especially the State Department bear blame for a strategy that has shipped forces overseas without the political and economic backing crucial for victory, Sanchez said in a speech to the press on Oct. 12/2007, in Arlington, Virginia²³. He also blamed the media for unscrupulous reporting, saying that “some have strayed from ethical standards and allowed external agendas to manipulate what the American public sees on TV, reads in newspapers and what they see on the Web.”²⁴

“Who will demand accountability for the failure of our national political leaders involved in the management of this war? In my profession, these types of leaders would immediately be relieved or court-martialed²⁵. After four years of fighting in Iraq,” he went on to say, “there was still no clarity within the civilian leadership,” which he accused of ‘lust for power.’²⁶

Sanchez condemned President George W. Bush’s infusion of as many as 30,000 extra U.S. troops in Iraq this year as a “desperate attempt” to make up for years of shortcomings due to having failed to accept the political and economic realities of this war, “a reality they have definitely not communicated to the American people,” he said. The best the U.S. can manage under the current approach is to “stave off defeat,” he added²⁷

“This enemy is more dangerous than any we have faced in the 20th century,” Sanchez asserted, adding that a sudden withdrawal of troops from Iraq would unleash chaos in the Middle East.

He claimed that the U.S. military effort has, from the 2003 invasion, been hasty and poorly managed.

“As a Japanese proverb says, ‘Action without vision is a nightmare,’” Sanchez said. “There is no question that America is living a nightmare with no end in sight. The American military finds itself in an intractable situation … America has no choice but to continue our efforts in Iraq.”

The Bush Administration began in 2005 negotiations behind the back of Congress and the American people to form a North-American Alliance between Canada, Mexico and the United States. This Alliance (NAU) is rapidly becoming a reality, including the creation of a new currency, called “Amero,” following the European example with the creation of the “Euro”.

WARNING: “Snopes”, the true and false web site on “urban legends” lists the reports on NAU as false! In view of several independent reports on this “alliance” I leave this statement and the endnotes letters still in. Once I shall have established that this report is indeed a hoax I shall remove the report from these pages.

Once these various global alliances are in place – such as also the Afro-Arab Alliance – these blocs will merge into one global bloc – the one world government, sharing a united economic, banking, military and religious system. The mighty men in the shadows know how to manipulate the people so that they even will WANT to have these “security” tags/chips applied to them, until the whole population will be controlled by the few, thereby creating a totalitarian government as foretold in Rev. 13:16.

There will be no place for any group or individual who refuses to be “tagged” as a “global” citizen.

Quote:: Under the TSA’s “Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) initiative,” you’ll need to obtain permission from the U.S. government to travel on ANY commercial airliner or ship that goes to or from the United States. You won’t receive your boarding pass until you are cleared by APIS. You’ll also need permission to travel through the United States (e.g., if you’re changing planes at a U.S. airport on a trip between two foreign countries). It doesn’t matter if you’re a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. Everyone will need permission to enter – or leave – the United States.

Then, on Aug. 23, 2007, the TSA issued proposed regulations for its “Secure Flight” program.

The TSA wants commercial airlines to submit passenger information through a single DHS portal for both the Secure Flight and APIS programs. This would result in one DHS system responsible for watch list matching for all aviation passengers. Naturally, the entire process – for both domestic and international travel – will occur in total secrecy. If you’re denied permission to travel, you won’t be able to appeal the decision to any court. Your only recourse will be through the TSA bureaucracy. Essentially, you’ll be reduced to pleading with the TSA to say something like, “pretty please, give me a boarding pass.”

What this amounts to is essentially a reprise of the infamous “internal passport” system in effect in the former Soviet Union. In 1933, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin introduced “internal passports” that prohibited Soviet citizens from leaving their place of residence without permission. Over time, the internal passport became the prime instrument of Soviet oppression over its citizens. It’s bad enough needing to ask Uncle Sam for permission to leave the United States, and to reenter it. But an internal passport is a blueprint for totalitarianism.”End of Quote

Never Again! Come Lord Yeshua!

And do you know what the NAIS ²⁸ is? It is the National Animal ID program to have every single livestock animal in the United States identified and tagged. It was originally designed to give the big beef producers help in getting export markets which required disease controls. All livestock animal movements will be tracked, logged and reported to the government. The benefit is to the big factory farms who probably do need this type of regulation. They get to do single ID’s for large groups of animals. Small farmers, pet owners and homesteaders will have to tag and track every single animal.

There are no exceptions – even small farms that sell direct to local consumers will be required to pay the fees and file all the paper work on all their animals. Even horse, llama and other pet owners will be required to participate in NAIS. Homesteaders who raise their own meat and grandma with her one egg hen will also have to register their homes as ‘farm premises’ and obtain a Premise ID, tag all their animals and submit all the paperwork and fees.

The USDA has slipped this plan in the back door without any legislation. This is going to be very expensive and guess who is going to pay for it in higher food prices… You!

Such is the picture of the erosion of America’s moral standards, ethical values, religious and democratic freedom, civil liberties, human rights and personal privacy. Already America is no longer what it used to be.

But it is the dividing up of G-d’s OWN land, the “holy” or “promised” Land – Israel – demanded by the American government under the Carter, Bush Sr. and Clinton administrations, and now most adamantly enforced upon the tiny Jewish nation by the George W. Bush government and his Secreatry of State, “Condy” Rice, that will lead to the disintegration of the United States:

“The leaders affirmed their commitment to a two-state solution, agreed that a Palestinian state cannot be born of violence and terror, and reiterated their acceptance of previous agreements and obligations, including the Roadmap.”²⁹

The upcoming U.S.-sponsored “peace” conference in Annapolis, Maryland, to take place in late November or early December 2007, will focus on Palestinian statehood hopes. Besides Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (also known as Abu Mazen) ministers of the “Quartet” will attend.

Olmert still insists on going to Annapolis, despite an assassination attempt on his life by 5 Fatah terrorists when on his way to meet with Abbas in Jericho. It was Abbas himself who assigned the main conspirator to Olmert’s motorcade, and who released the terrorists just a few weeks following their immediate arrest.

To this MK Tzvi Hendel (NU/NRP) suggested Sunday (Oct. 21) that Prime Minister Ehud Olmert seek professional help. “A prime minister who is willing to negotiate with Abu Mazen, who set free terrorists who tried to murder him, needs to be examined by the best professionals, because this really is not politics but sheer insanity.”³⁰

Exactly! Yet on they go, lured irresistibly into pursuing this insanity of a two state solution with a people devoted to Israel’s destruction, as foretold in Joel 3. G-d sits in the heavens and laughs, holding the scheming and plotting nations in derision. Up they will go in the balances on the day He will bring them into judgment³¹.

Therefore I urge again that incessant prayers be made for the United States of America to quit this madness of dividing up the covenanted Land. Yes, it will be divided up – for Scripture cannot be broken³² -, but let it not be by “Columbia”³³, else “Columbia will break up over Palestine.” G-d warned most forcefully of this potential consequence with the breaking up of the space shuttle Columbia, her pieces coming down on Palestine in Texas, George W. Bush’s home state³⁴.

It was the first time ever that an Israeli participated in the space mission. The other 6 were American nationals of diverse racial and ethnic background. Israel will get hurt from the dividing up of her land, but America will get hurt more, 6 times more in proportion to the number of her population. Israel will get divided up temporarily until Messiah returns, but “Columbia’s” union will be broken permanently.

Pray that this WILL NEVER HAPPEN!!!

I desire to close this long letter of eye opening, depressing and distressing news on a note of hope and encouragement, which shows that no matter what, our G-d is in control. If we make Him our Refuge and our Hiding Place, He will deliver us in times of troubles and keep us safe. And even if we are slated to suffer temporarily for our faith, it is not worth comparing with the glory and the joy that awaits us in His Kingdom.

Quote: <A few months before he died at the age of 108, one of Israel’s most prominent rabbis, Yitzhak Kaduri, supposedly wrote the name of the Messiah on a small note which he requested would remain sealed until now¥. When the note was unsealed, it revealed what many have known for centuries: Yehoshua, or Yeshua (Jesus), is the Messiah³⁵.

With the biblical name of Jesus, the Rabbi and kabbalist described the Messiah using six words and hinting that the initial letters form the name of the Messiah. The secret note said:

Concerning the letter abbreviation of the Messiah’s name, He will lift the people and prove that his word and law are valid. ^a

This I have signed in the month of mercy,
Yitzhak Kaduri

The Hebrew sentence (translated in bold) with the hidden name of the Messiah reads: Yarim Ha’Am Veyokhiakh Shedvaro Vetorato Omdim

The initials spell the Hebrew name of Jesus, Yehoshua. Yehoshua and Yeshua are effectively the same name, derived from the same Hebrew root of the word “salvation” as documented in Zechariah 6:11 and Ezra 3:2. The same scribe writes in Ezra, “Yeshua son of Yozadak” while writing in Zechariah “Yehoshua son of Yohozadak.” The scribe adds the holy abbreviation of God’s name, ho, in the father’s name Yozadak and in the name Yeshua.

With one of Israel’s most prominent rabbis indicating the name of the Messiah is Yeshua, it is understandable why his last wish was to wait one year after his death before revealing what he wrote.

His spiritual portrayals of the Messiah—reminiscent of New Testament accounts—were published on the websites Kaduri.net and Nfc:

“Will all believe in the Messiah right away? No, in the beginning some of us will believe in him and some not. It will be easier for non-religious people to follow the Messiah than for Orthodox people…”

“The revelation of the Messiah will be fulfilled in two stages… [here Kaduri gets past and present mixed up, as through the prophetic tele-lens of time one cannot identify the distance of time]. Then he will reveal himself to some Jews (I am such a one³⁶), not necessarily to wise Torah scholars. It can be even simple people. Only then he will reveal himself to the whole nation. The people will wonder and say: ‘What, that’s the Messiah?’ Many have known his name but have not believed that he is the Messiah.”>End of Quote

Just as Joseph, this “lord of the Gentiles”, revealed himself to his brothers and did not condemn them, so will Yeshua, who for 1800 years was Lord of the Gentiles, reveal Himself to His natural brethren and not condemn them, for He came to save and not to condemn the lost sheep of the House of Israel³⁷.

Our King is coming! Maranatha!

Yours in Him,

34 see https://www.ortzion.org/images/Columbia_trgdy.html

35 see http://www.israeltoday.co.il/default.aspx?tabid=128?view=item?idx=1347

¥ My comment: i.e., there was no courage involved in making this revelation when he stipulated for it to be made known only after his death, because he apparently feared being cast out of synagogue and rejected and shunned by all his fellows. Hence, while making this revelation he seems not himself to have been a believer.

36 See https://www.ortzion.org/images/truestory.html

37 Zech. 112:10-14; Gen. 45:4-8; Matt. 15:24; Lk 9:56; 19:10; Jn 12:47; http://www.his-forever.com/leading_kabbalist_urges_jews_to_israel.htm

Quote is from Arutz Sheva (see footnote 35) and www.christian-forum.net (linked on “the name of the Messiah is Yeshua”) –

San Diego Mayor Jerry Sanders told people to “stay at home, stay off the freeways” so fire crews and evacuees could keep moving as the winds changed course. He said about 1,000 homes in San Diego County had been destroyed.

“We are in for another very dangerous day today. We may be forced to do very quick and immediate evacuations,” said Ron Lane, head of San Diego County office of emergency services.

“We no doubt are going to be issuing additional evacuation notices today,” he added.

Officials said people were cooperating and evacuating quickly, resulting in minimal loss of life, as they remembered the last major fire in 2003 when 15 people died and 5,000 buildings were destroyed.

“We’ve been through this before,” said Sonya Johnson, 43, who evacuated with her husband and young son and set up camp in the Qualcomm sports stadium.

“I am sitting here thinking about the things I didn’t take, like pictures and our will,” she added.

At least 17 fires, whipped by hot, dry Santa Ana winds gusting to 70 miles per hour (113 kph) have swept the drought-stricken region unchecked over the past two days from Santa Barbara to the Mexican border 230 miles (370 km) to the south.

Just one person has died, in a San Diego fire on Sunday, and some three dozen have been injured.

Two new fires erupted overnight in both Los Angeles and San Diego counties and burned quickly. But in the celebrity enclave of Malibu, north of Los Angeles, where the first fire raged early Sunday, there was no active burning and 500 of the 1,400 firefighters were dispatched to other areas.

President George W. Bush early on Tuesday declared an emergency in the state and authorized the Federal Emergency Management Agency to coordinate disaster relief in the seven counties stricken by wildfires.

Some 300,000 acres (120,000 hectares) have burned, an area about twice the size of Chicago, stretching fire crews and state emergency services. But federal authorities said the emergency response was well under control.

High wind warnings remained in effect for most of the region until Wednesday afternoon.

HUMANS, HORSES, PETS

Gov. Arnold SChwarzenegger summoned aid from 1,500 National Guard troops, including 200 from the Mexican border, to help with firefighting, evacuations and crowd control.

Neighboring states, including Nevada and Arizona, rushed in crews and equipment.

Tens of thousands of evacuees in San Diego, including senior citizens from nursing homes, went to the Qualcomm stadium, where the National Football League’s San Diego Chargers play, or to the Del Mar Fairgrounds, famed for its horse racing track. Thousands of horses and pets were also accommodated.

Evacuees at Qualcomm said the operation was well organized and clean, a sharp contrast to the chaos at New Orleans’ Superdome, which was used as a refuge after Hurricane Katrina flooded the city in 2005.

But the San Diego residents were anxious to return home and worried about what they left behind.

“You just get tired, tired of waiting,” said Brad Donaldson, 53, who evacuated to Qualcomm with his wife on Monday.

In addition to mandatory evacuations through much of the area north of the city, voluntary evacuations were announced for South San Diego near the Mexican border.

The Marine base at Camp Pendleton, one of the largest in the United States, was on alert for possible evacuation of its 60,000 people, including families.

The firestorms closed major highways, schools and businesses and plumes of thick black smoke drifted across much of Southern California, blotting out the sun.

The economic costs have yet to be tallied in wealthy San Diego, home to big communications and biotechnology companies as well as a large tourism industry.

And despite high real estate values in the area, with an average home cost of $500,000, big U.S. insurers were not expected to see major losses from the wildfires, analysts said.

(Additional reporting by Marty Graham in San Diego)

(10-24) 04:00 PDT San Diego – —

Deadly, wind-whipped wildfires have caused the largest evacuation in state history, forcing more than 500,000 people to flee ahead of flames that destroyed more than 1,300 homes and continued Tuesday to threaten tens of thousands more.

About 375,000 acres, or 585 square miles, were ablaze in Southern California. The number of people joining the mandatory exodus and the number of homes destroyed were expected to grow as new fires started and others continued to burn a path toward the sea through populated communities.

“This is the largest mass evacuation of a natural disaster in California history,” said Daniel Berlant, spokesman for the state’s Department of Forestry and Fire Protection.

In San Diego County, authorities placed evacuation calls to 346,000 homes, said Luis Monteagudo, a spokesman for the county’s emergency effort. The county estimates, based on census tracts, that approximately 560,000 people were ordered to leave.

To the northeast, fires in the San Bernardino mountains forced the evacuation of entire communities surrounding the resort area of Lake Arrowhead. More than 300 homes burned.

Thousands of people, including hospital patients, fled advancing flames that leaped through the mountains, burning one home after another, destroying at least 425 and threatening as many as 10,000 more, said U.S. Forest Service spokeswoman Gina Sampson.

In Orange County, a fire chief lashed out at state officials, saying air support, such as tankers, might have helped control fires before they burned homes had it been available.

“There is not enough resources to go around … because of the number of fires that are going on in our state right now,” Orange County Fire Authority Chief Chip Prather said.

He said a dozen firefighters battling blazes in the Irvine and Lake Forest areas had to deploy emergency shelters, a last resort when they are surrounded by flames, or take cover in buildings.

“They should not have had to do that,” he said. “If we’d had the resources earlier to take care of those lines with hand crews, we wouldn’t have been in that situation.”

Prather spoke minutes before Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger, touring fire damage in Lake Arrowhead, promised more help, including more people and equipment.

When asked about the fire chief’s critical remarks, the governor said: “I’m not aware of that.”

Berlant defended his agency’s actions, saying the department had gone on high alert late last week and shifted resources to the San Diego area in advance of the predicted Santa Ana winds.

On Tuesday, the fire agency took the additional step of suspending the closing of fire season in Northern California, a maneuver allowing it to send virtually every state fire engine to battle the Southern California fires.

Caravans of fire engines could be seen rolling down Interstate 5 – more than 500 miles and a day’s drive from the closest blaze.

In San Diego County, site of the only directly related death so far, another 530 homes were reported damaged Tuesday.

The San Diego medical examiner’s officer listed four other deaths as connected to the wildfires. Three were people in their 90s who died from natural causes; the fourth was a woman who died after falling at a restaurant.

The fire victim was identified as Thomas Varshock of Tecate, a town on the U.S. side of the border southeast of San Diego, the San Diego County medical examiner’s office said. Authorities had told him to evacuate, but he didn’t leave, the medical examiner’s office said.

Forty-five injuries were reported throughout Southern California, including at least 21 firefighters. The UC San Diego Medical Center Regional Burn Center was treating 16 patients from the San Diego County fires.

President Bush, responding to entreaties from Schwarzenegger, declared a state of emergency in California, paving the way for federal disaster aid, and said he would survey the state personally on Thursday. Mindful of the embarrassment his administration suffered after the Gulf Coast disaster two years ago, Bush dispatched officials from the Department of Homeland Security to assess the damage.

The governor, citing damage to “critical infrastructure, including roads, bridges, public buildings and utilities,” estimated that $75 million in federal assistance would be needed.

The Department of Defense agreed to send six Air Force and Air National Guard water- or retardant-dropping planes to the region.

Fire crews and fleeing residents described desperate conditions that were sure to get worse. Temperatures across Southern California were about 10 degrees above average and approached 100 degrees Tuesday in Orange and San Diego counties, where sustained Santa Ana winds gusted in some areas to 65 mph.

Thousands of residents throughout Southern California sought shelter at fairgrounds, schools and community centers. The largest gathering was at Qualcomm Stadium in San Diego, where evacuees anxiously watched the stadium’s television sets, hoping for a glimpse of their neighborhood on the local news. The clubhouse at the famous Del Mar racetrack was converted into a shelter.

“We’re going crazy trying to get back into our apartment just to see what kind of damage we’ve got,” said Tim Harrington, who arrived at the racetrack with his wife, son and their two pet rats.

“Then we’ll pick up the pieces from there.”

By Tuesday evening, residents were being allowed back into two evacuated neighborhoods in San Diego – Del Mar Heights, near the ocean, and Scripps Ranch – as well as an evacuated portion of the city of Poway.

Public schools were closed, as were campuses at UC San Diego and San Diego State.

At Marine Corps Air Station Miramar, about 40 aircraft that included F-18 fighter jets, C-130 cargo planes and Marine helicopters were ordered to other bases in California and Arizona.

Schwarzenegger, Homeland Security Secretary Michael Chertoff, Federal Emergency Management Agency Administrator R. David Paulison and other officials toured burn areas in San Diego and the evacuation center at Qualcomm Stadium.
On Tuesday, California Insurance Commissioner Steve Poizner established two teams of experts in the Southern California fire zones – one knowledgeable about the claims process “to help victims cut through red tape and see them paid as quickly as possible” and the other to deal with scamming of victims.
Agriculture Undersecretary Mark Rey, who oversees the Forest Service, predicted Tuesday that the fires could cost federal, state and local governments more than $100 million.
Chronicle staff writer George Raine and the New York Times contributed to this report. Online resources For a Los Angeles Times/Google map of the fires, go to: links.sfgate.com/ZBII
This article appeared on page A – 1 of the San Francisco Chronicle

The Marketing of Evil

“David Kupelian dares to tell the truth.” – Dr. Laura Schlessinger

“Now watch the cockroaches run for cover.” – Michelle Malkin

“In years to come Americans will acknowledge a debt of gratitude to David Kupelian for his honesty, courage, and laser-like insight in this must-read book.” – Rabbi Daniel Lapin

Millions of Americans today accept ideas and behaviors that would have horrified all previous generations. Why?

o Why is anti-Americanism becoming commonplace—among Americans?
o What’s behind the sexual revolution—in middle school?
o Why are parents increasingly afraid to let their children watch TV?
o Why is our legal system criminalizing public prayer?
o Why do half of all American marriages fall apart—including Christian
marriages?
o How is it possible that near-term babies are legally aborted—despite
public disapproval?
o Why is it increasingly hard to know if experts are telling us the truth?

As veteran journalist David Kupelian ?documents in this stunning expos?, the answers to these questions lie in the pervasive influence of what he calls the “marketers of evil.”

“The plain truth,” Kupelian writes, “is that within the space of our lifetime, much of what Americans once almost universally abhorred has been packaged, perfumed, gift-wrapped, and sold to us as though it had great value. By skillfully playing on our deep felt national values of fairness, generosity, and tolerance, these marketers have persuaded us to embrace as enlightened and noble that which all previous generations since America’s founding regarded as grossly self-destructive—in a word, evil.”

In The Marketing of Evil you will learn:

o How giant entertainment corporations use all the powerful psychological tools of modern marketing
and manipulation to get America’s children not only to buy the latest products but to rebel against
their parents’ values.
o How a fraudulent scientist, widely revered as the father of the “sexual revolution,” has no been exposed
as a sexual psychopath who encouraged pedophilia.
o How the ACLU and others intent on removing every reference to God in the public square are espousing
a dangerous and provably false legal theory of church-state separation.
o How the establishment news media have conformed to a comprehensive “gay rights” marketing plan openly
published by professional Harvard-trained marketers.
o How the abortion lobby conned us with a slick public relations campaign based on lies and wild fabrications
that are still widely accepted as “facts.”
o How the marketers of evil have tricked America’s churches out of their natural leadership role in society –
and how that vital role can and must be reclaimed.

If you have wondered how America has been transformed so rapidly from a strong Judeo-Christian culture into a divided, confused, and contentious society increasingly hostile to its own core values, you must read The Marketing of Evil.

By David Kupelian

Americans have come to tolerate, embrace and even champion many things that would have horrified their parents’ generation – from easy divorce and unrestricted abortion-on-demand to extreme body piercing and teaching homosexuality to grade-schoolers. Does that mean today’s Americans are inherently more morally confused and depraved than previous generations? Of course not, says veteran journalist David Kupelian. But they have fallen victim to some of the most stunningly brilliant and compelling marketing campaigns in modern history.

“The Marketing of Evil” reveals how much of what Americans once almost universally abhorred has been packaged, perfumed, gift-wrapped and sold to them as though it had great value. Highly skilled marketers, playing on our deeply felt national values of fairness, generosity and tolerance, have persuaded us to embrace as enlightened and noble that which all previous generations since America’s founding regarded as grossly self-destructive – in a word, evil.

In this groundbreaking and meticulously researched book, Kupelian peels back the veil of marketing-induced deception to reveal exactly when, where, how, and especially why Americans bought into the lies that now threaten the future of the country.

For example, few of us realize that the widely revered father of the “sexual revolution” has been irrefutably exposed as a full-fledged sexual psychopath who encouraged pedophilia. Or that giant corporations voraciously competing for America’s $150 billion teen market routinely infiltrate young people’s social groups to find out how better to lead children into ever more debauched forms of “authentic self-expression.”

Likewise, most of us mistakenly believe the “abortion rights” and “gay rights” movements were spontaneous, grassroots uprisings of neglected or persecuted minorities wanting to breathe free. Few people realize America was actually “sold” on abortion thanks to an audacious public relations campaign that relied on fantastic lies and fabrications. Or that the “gay rights” movement – which transformed America’s former view of homosexuals as self-destructive human beings into their current status as victims and cultural heroes – faithfully followed an in-depth, phased plan laid out by professional Harvard-trained marketers.

No quarter is given in this riveting, insightful exploration of how lies, both subtle and outrageous, are packaged as truth. From the federal government to the public school system to the news media to the hidden creators of “youth culture,” nothing is exempt from the thousand-watt spotlight of Kupelian’s journalistic inquiry.

In the end, “The Marketing of Evil” is an up-close, modern-day look at what is traditionally known as “temptation” – the art and science of making evil look good.

About the author: David Kupelian is the managing editor of WorldNetDaily.com, the world’s largest independent news Web site. He is also a widely read online columnist and the driving force behind the acclaimed monthly news magazine Whistleblower.

“It’s often said that marketing is warfare, and in ‘The Marketing of Evil,’ David Kupelian clearly reveals the stunning strategies and tactics of persuasion employed by those engaged in an all-out war against America’s Judeo-Christian culture. If you really want to understand the adversary’s thinking and help turn the tide of battle, read this book!”
– DAVID LIMBAUGH, syndicated columnist and author

“David Kupelian’s research brings into sharp focus what many have sensed and suspected for a long time: The effort to change America’s mind on issues like abortion, homosexuality, church-state separation, and more, is a well-thought-out strategic campaign that uses the methods of Madison Avenue to market rank lies. But the good news is that the truth will eventually win out, and Kupelian’s important and groundbreaking book makes enormous progress toward that end.”
– D. JAMES KENNEDY, Coral Ridge Ministries

“Every parent in America needs to read this book. David Kupelian skillfully exposes the secular left’s rotten apple peddlers in devastating detail. From pitching promiscuity as ‘freedom’ to promoting abortion as ‘choice,’ the marketers of evil are always selling you something destructive – with catastrophic results. Kupelian shines a light on them all. Now watch the cockroaches run for cover.”
– MICHELLE MALKIN, Fox News Channel

“Over just a few years, life in America has become indescribably more squalid, expensive, and dangerous. Like the dazzling disclosures in the final page of a gripping whodunit or the fascinating revelation of a magician’s secrets, ‘The Marketing of Evil’ irresistibly exposes how it was done. It will elicit an involuntary ‘Aha!’ from you as you discover who did it and your soul will soar with optimism as you discover the only way we can undo it. In years to come Americans will acknowledge a debt of gratitude to David Kupelian for his honesty, courage, and laser-like insight in this must-read book.”
– RABBI DANIEL LAPIN, Toward Tradition

“Marketers are out to get America’s youth, and they’ll stop at nothing to do it. In ‘The Marketing of Evil,’ David Kupelian treats parents to a rare insider look at exactly how our children – and adults too – are being lied to, confused, and seduced by radicals and phony experts. The game’s over, folks – the con men have been exposed. I urge every parent to read this eye-opening book.”
– REBECCA HAGELIN, the Heritage Foundation

“Did you ever want to know – I mean really know – how and why America is being transformed from a unified, Judeo-Christian society into a divided, false, murky, neo-pagan culture? Even if you think you know the answers to those questions, in fact, especially if you think you know the answers, you must read David Kupelian’s ‘The Marketing of Evil.’ So clearly does it expose the incredible con game to which Americans have been subjected that it offers real hope – because when our problems come this sharply into focus, so do the solutions.”
– JOSEPH FARAH, WorldNetDaily

“Excellent! Simply excellent. If you want to solidify your Christian worldview – or just understand what the culture war is all about – you owe it yourself to read David Kupelian’s ‘The Marketing of Evil.'”
– DONALD E. WILDMON, American Family Association

Hal Lindsey, columnist and best-selling author of 20 books, including one of the best-selling books of all time, “The Late, Great Planet Earth,” says: “David Kupelian’s book is like a giant X-ray machine that exposes the atheistic, secular left’s brilliant marketing campaigns aimed at seducing America away from its founding Judeo-Christian faith. If you want to know how such a thoroughly decent country as America could go so wrong so fast, you simply have to read ‘The Marketing of Evil.'”

Today’s Hidden Slave Trade

By BOB HERBERT

Published: October 27, 2007

The woman testifying in federal court in Lower Manhattan could hardly have seemed more insignificant.She was an immigrant from South Korea and a prostitute, who spoke little or no English. She worked, she said, in brothels in New York, Philadelphia, Georgia, Connecticut, Rhode Island and Washington, D.C.

She did not offer a portrait of the good life. Speaking through an interpreter, she told about the time in D.C. when a guy came in who looked “like a mental patient, a psycho.” Weirded out, she wanted nothing to do with him. But she said the woman who ran the brothel assured her everything would be fine.

It was fine if you consider wrestling with Hannibal Lecter fine. The john clawed at this woman, gouging her flesh, peeling the skin from her back and other parts of her body. She was badly injured.

According to the government, the woman was caught up in a prostitution and trafficking network that ruthlessly exploited young Korean women, some of whom “were smuggled into the country illegally.”

In prior eras, the slave trade was conducted openly, with ads prominently posted and the slaves paraded and inspected like animals, often at public auctions. Today’s sex traffickers, the heirs to that tradition, try to keep their activities hidden, although the rest of the sex trade, the sale of the women’s services, is advertised on a scale that can only be characterized as colossal.

As a society, we’re repelled by the slavery of old. But the wholesale transport of women and girls across international borders and around the U.S. — to serve as prostitutes under conditions that in most cases are coercive at best — stirs very little outrage.

Leaf through the Yellow Pages in some American cities and you’ll find pages upon pages of ads: “Korean Girl, 18 — Affordable.” “Korean and Japanese Dolls — Full Service.” “Barely Legal China Doll — Pretty and Petite.”

The Internet and magazines have staggering numbers of similar ads. Thousands upon thousands of women have been brought here from Asia and elsewhere and funneled into the sex trade, joining those who are already here and in the business but unable to keep up with the ferocious demand.

This human merchandise — whether imported or domestic — is still paraded, inspected and treated like animals.

What’s important to keep in mind is the great extent to which the sex trade involves real slavery (kidnapping and rape), widespread physical abuse, indentured servitude, exploitation of minors and many other forms of coercion. This modern-day variation on the ancient theme of bondage flourishes largely because of the indifference of the rest of us, and the misogyny that holds fast to the view of women — all women — as sexual commodities.

The case in Manhattan federal court involves a ring that, according to prosecutors, used massage parlors and spas as fronts for prostitution. Some of the women were in the U.S. legally. Others, according to the government, were brought in by brokers (more accurately, traffickers or dealers in flesh), who provided false passports, visas and other documents.

Elie Honig, an assistant United States attorney, said women brought in illegally were pushed into prostitution to earn money “to pay back the tens of thousands of dollars that the brokers charged the women as quote, unquote, fees for bringing them into the United States.”

He told the jury: “We are talking about a regional network of businesses throughout the Northeast United States and beyond involved in transporting and selling women.”

A jury will decide whether the five defendants in this case — all Korean women, and accused of running a prostitution enterprise — are guilty. But the activities alleged by the government mirror the sexual trafficking and organized prostitution that is carried out on a vast scale here in the U.S. and around the world.

There is nothing benign about these activities. Upwards of 18,000 foreign nationals are believed to be trafficked into the U.S. each year. According to the State Department, 80 percent of trafficked people are women and children, an overwhelming majority of whom are trafficked for sexual purposes.

Those who think that most of the women in prostitution want to be there are deluded. Surveys consistently show that a majority wants very much to leave. Apologists love to spread the fantasy of the happy hooker. But the world of the prostitute is typically filled with pimps, sadists, psychopaths, drug addicts, violent criminals and disease.

Jody Williams is a former prostitute who runs a support group called Sex Workers Anonymous. Few women want to become prostitutes, she told me, and nearly all would like to get out.

“They want to quit for the obvious reasons,” she said. “The danger. The physical and emotional distress. The toll that it takes. The shame.”

Past Coverage

Japan Court Rules Against Sex Slaves and Laborers (April 28, 2007)

Related Searches

• Women
• Sexual Slavery
• Prostitution

Far East, South and Southeast Asia and Pacific Areas

The North American Union to Replace USA?

Note from a friend: I heard a radio personality talking on this in Dallas as well. It’s obviously coming forth! Not sure why it didn’t really make the news in 2005 – but maybe the immigration issue is the catalyst for the revelation of it! V

This article was posted on the “Battalion of Deborah” – http://feedblitz.com/r.asp?l=479735?f=14088 listing.

President Bush is pursuing a globalist agenda to create a North American Union, effectively erasing our borders with both Mexico and Canada. This was the hidden agenda behind the Bush administration’s true open borders policy.

Secretly, the Bush administration is pursuing a policy to expand NAFTA to include Canada, setting the stage for North American Union designed to encompass the U.S., Canada, and Mexico. What the Bush administration truly wants is the free, unimpeded movement of people across open borders with Mexico and Canada.

President Bush intends to abrogate U.S. sovereignty to the North American Union, a new economic and political entity which the President is quietly forming, much as the European Union has formed.

The blueprint President Bush is following was laid out in a 2005 report entitled “Building a North American Community” published by the left-of-center Council on Foreign Relations (CFR). The CFR report connects the dots between the Bush administration’s actual policy on illegal immigration and the drive to create the North American Union:

At their meeting in Waco, Texas, at the end of March 2005, U.S. President George W. Bush, Mexican President Vicente Fox, and Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin committed their governments to a path of cooperation and joint action. We welcome this important development and offer this report to add urgency and specific recommendations to strengthen their efforts.

What is the plan? Simple, erase the borders. The plan is contained in a “Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America” little noticed when President Bush and President Fox created it in March 2005:

In March 2005, the leaders of Canada, Mexico, and the United States adopted a Security and Prosperity Partnership of North America (SPP), establishing ministerial-level working groups to address key security and economic issues facing North America and setting a short deadline for reporting progress back to their governments. President Bush described the significance of the SPP as putting forward a common commitment “to markets and democracy, freedom and trade, and mutual prosperity and security.” The policy framework articulated by the three leaders is a significant commitment that will benefit from broad discussion and advice. The Task Force is pleased to provide specific advice on how the partnership can be pursued and realized.

To that end, the Task Force proposes the creation by 2010 of a North American community to enhance security, prosperity, and opportunity. We propose a community based on the principle affirmed in the March 2005 Joint Statement of the three leaders that “our security and prosperity are mutually dependent and complementary.” Its boundaries will be defined by a common external tariff and an outer security perimeter within which the movement of people, products, and capital will be legal, orderly and safe. Its goal will be to guarantee a free, secure, just, and prosperous North America.

The perspective of the CFR report allows us to see President Bush’s speech to the nation as nothing more than public relations posturing and window dressing. No wonder President Vincente Fox called President Bush in a panic after the speech. How could the President go back on his word to Mexico by actually securing our border? Not to worry, President Bush reassured President Fox. The National Guard on the border were only temporary, meant to last only as long until the public forgets about the issue, as has always been the case in the past.

The North American Union plan, which Vincente Fox has every reason to presume President Bush is still following, calls for the only border to be around the North American Union — not between any of these countries. Or, as the CFR report stated:

The three governments should commit themselves to the long-term goal of dramatically diminishing the need for the current intensity of the governments’ physical control of cross-border traffic, travel, and trade within North America. A long-term goal for a North American border action plan should be joint screening of travelers from third countries at their first point of entry into North America and the elimination of most controls over the temporary movement of these travelers within North America.

Discovering connections like this between the CFR recommendations and Bush administration policy gives credence to the argument that President Bush favors amnesty and open borders, as he originally said. Moreover, President Bush most likely continues to consider groups such as the Minuteman Project to be “vigilantes,” as he has also said in response to a reporter’s question during the March 2005 meeting with President Fox.

Why doesn’t President Bush just tell the truth? His secret agenda is to dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union. The administration has no intent to secure the border, or to enforce rigorously existing immigration laws. Securing our border with Mexico is evidently one of the jobs President Bush just won’t do. If a fence is going to be built on our border with Mexico, evidently the Minuteman Project is going to have to build the fence themselves. Will President Bush protect America’s sovereignty, or is this too a job the Minuteman Project will have to do for him?

President Bush’s Secret Agenda: Dissolve the United States of America into the North American Union

An Internal Passport System is a Blueprint For Totalitarianism

Now, the Transportation Safety Administration (TSA) has proposed a similar system for travel on commercial airlines WITHIN the United States. Both systems will come into effect Feb. 19, 2008.

Under the TSA’s “Advance Passenger Information System (APIS) initiative,” you’ll need to obtain permission from the U.S. government to travel on ANY commercial airliner or ship that goes to or from the United States. You won’t receive your boarding pass until you are cleared by APIS. You’ll also need permission to travel through the United States (e.g., if you’re changing planes at a U.S. airport on a trip between two foreign countries). It doesn’t matter if you’re a U.S. citizen or permanent resident. Everyone will need permission to enter – or leave – the United States.

Then, on Aug. 23, 2007, the TSA issued proposed regulations for its “Secure Flight” program.

The TSA wants commercial airlines to submit passenger information through a single DHS portal for both the Secure Flight and APIS programs. This would result in one DHS system responsible for watch list matching for all aviation passengers. Naturally, the entire process – for both domestic and international travel – will occur in total secrecy. If you’re denied permission to travel, you won’t be able to appeal the decision to any court. Your only recourse will be through the TSA bureaucracy. Essentially, you’ll be reduced to pleading with the TSA to say something like, “pretty please, give me a boarding pass.”

What this amounts to is essentially a reprise of the infamous “internal passport” system in effect in the former Soviet Union. In 1933, Soviet dictator Josef Stalin introduced “internal passports” that prohibited Soviet citizens from leaving their place of residence without permission. Over time, the internal passport became the prime instrument of Soviet oppression over its citizens. It’s bad enough needing to ask Uncle Sam for permission to leave the United States, and to reenter it. But an internal passport is a blueprint for totalitarianism.

Mark Nestman, Privacy Expert ? President
The Nestmann Group www.nestmann.com

NoNAIS.org

Protect Traditional Rights to Farm

“USDA’s proposed program could be compared to a finely crafted blueprint for a concrete blimp.” -LivestockWeek

“NAIS is like driving thumb tacks with a 100 lb sledge hammer.” -WJ

“The USDA’s version of voluntary is like auto licenses.” -Paul H.

“BSE announcements do not affect consumer buying.” -USDA Study

“It is difficult to imagine any acceptable basis for the (USDA) to subject the owner of a chicken to more intrusive
surveillance than the owner of a gun.” -Mary Zanoni

NAIS is “No Chicken Left Behind” – government mandates with little funding. -S. Maricle

Just the Facts
* About NoNAIS.org
* But what is NAIS?
* Can NAIS affect me?
* Does NAIS Stop Disease?
* How did it happen?
* How will we stop NAIS?
* Sample Letter
* State Contacts
* Timeline?
* What can I do to help?

wAdditional Actions
wLinking to NoNAIS.org
wRadio Station Contacts
wSubscribe to NoNAIS.org

NoNAIS is my effort to spread the word of how harmful the USDA’s National Animal Identification System (NAIS) is to small farmers, homesteaders, pet owners ? consumers.

Walter Jeffries
Sugar Mountain Farm
in Vermont

October 24, 2007

USDA Attempts to Subvert FOIA

Background Info, News, Commentary — walterj 1:16 am
Just in from Mary Zanoni:

Today the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee released its preliminary drafts of the Chairman’s mark for all titles of the Senate’s 2007 Farm Bill; the Committee markup of the bill is set for tomorrow, October 24, 2007, at 9:30 A.M.

The draft of the livestock title contains a FOIA [Freedom Of Information Act – See this.] exemption for information in the National Animal Identification System (NAIS). (A copy of the livestock title of the draft Chairman’s mark from the Senate Agriculture Committee’s website is attached; the FOIA exemption appears on pages 40 through 43 of the draft.) This proposed exemption flies in the face of all reasonable standards of open access to government. Since 2005, the Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service of the USDA has been collecting what the USDA itself calls “phone book” information on farms and other premises that hold livestock in the United States. USDA/APHIS is presently maintaining this information in a database called the National Premises Information Repository in Fort Collins, Colorado. For each livestock location, the information consists of nothing more than basic contact information, i.e., the name of a contact person, an address, a telephone number, and in some cases an email address, and the species of livestock kept at that location.

Yet at the behest of industrial farming interests, the Senate Agriculture Committee sees fit to propose that this “phone book” information should receive a new exemption from the Freedom of Information Act. Even more alarming, the proposed exemption purports to override all state freedom of information laws that might pertain to similar records.

This proposed FOIA exemption for the commonplace contact information of livestock facilities flies in the face of the pending FOIA amendments of S. 849; those pending FOIA amendments would, inter alia, require that any legislation containing FOIA exemptions must specifically state that it contains an exemption to the disclosure normally required under the Freedom of Information Act. Yet the livestock title of the Senate Farm Bill sets forth what is in fact an unprecedented and unwarranted exemption to FOIA disclosure without once mentioning FOIA — in other words, if S. 849 were already law, it would prohibit exactly the type of under-the-radar FOIA exemption being proposed in the Senate Farm Bill livestock title. This is the more distressing for freedom-of-information advocates in that Senator Leahy, the main sponsor of S. 849, is also a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee.

All friends of open government should protest the inclusion of Sec. 10305, “Protection of Information in the Animal Identification System,” in the draft Senate farm bill and should demand that this provision be abandoned.

(The pertinent section of the draft bill is set forth below in its entirety.)

Mary-Louise Zanoni
Attorney-at-Law
P.O. Box 501
5862 U.S. Highway
11 Canton
New York 13617
315-386-3199

Sec. 10305. Protection of Information in the Animal Identification System.

The Animal Health Protection Act (7 U.S.C. 8301 et seq.) is amended –

(1) by redesignating sections 10416 through 10418 as sections 10417 through 10419, respectively; and (2) by inserting
after section 10415 the following:

“Sec. 10416. Disclosure of Information Under a National Animal Identification System.

“(a) Definition of National Animal Identification System. — In this section, the term ‘national animal identification system’
means a system for identifying or tracing animals that is established by the Secretary.

“(b) Protection from Disclosure. –

“(1) In general.–Information obtained through a national animal identification system shall not be disclosed except as
provided in this section.

“(2) Use. — Use of information described in paragraph (1) by any individual or entity except as otherwise provided in this
section shall be considered a violation of this Act.

“(3) Waiver of Privilege of Protection. — The provision of information to a national animal identification system under this
section or the disclosure of information pursuant to this section shall not constitute a waiver of any applicable privilege or
protection under Federal law, including protection of trade secrets.

“(c) Limited Release of Information. — The Secretary may disclose information obtained through a national animal
identification system if –

“(1) the Secretary determines that livestock may be threatened by a disease or pest;

“(2) the release of the information is related to an action the Secretary may take under this subtitle; and

“(3) the Secretary determines that the disclosure of the information to a government entity or person is necessary to assist
the Secretary in carrying out this subtitle or a national animal identification system.

“(d) Required Disclosure of Information. — The Secretary shall disclose information obtained through a national animal
identification system regarding particular animals to –

“(1) the person that owns or controls the animals, if the person requests the information in writing;

“(2) the State Department of Agriculture for the purpose of the protection of animal health;

“(3) the Attorney General for the purpose of law enforcement;

“(4) the Secretary of Homeland Security for the purpose of homeland security;

“(5) the Secretary of Health and Human Services for the purpose of protecting public health;

“(6) an entity pursuant to an order of a court of competent jurisdiction; and

“(7) the government of a foreign country if disclosure of the information is necessary to trace animals that pose a disease
or pest threat to livestock or a danger to human health, as determined by the Secretary.

“(e) Disclosure under State or Local Law. — Any information relating to animal identification that a State or local
government obtains from the Secretary shall not be made available by the State or local government pursuant to any State
or local law requiring disclosure of information or records to the public.

“(f) Reporting requirement. — To disclose information under this section, the Secretary shall –

“(1) certify that the disclosure was necessary under this section; and

“(2) submit to the Committee on Agriculture of the House of Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry of the Senate a copy of the certification.”

October 20, 2007

Fighting Unreasonable Laws

News — walterj 5:32 am
There is a good article in the Washington Post about a Pennsylvannia couple, Richard Bean and Jean Rinaldi of the Double H Farm, who are trying to fight the laws that prevent on-farm slaughter and over regulate direct farm to consumer sales. The article is also important to read because it shows how not to go about fighting the law. Last session we made progress here in Vermont with the poultry slaughter. Raw milk is another big issue as is on-farm slaughter of bigger livestock. If you oppose government over regulation and micro-management of our lives then I strongly suggest checking out the article and then working to change the laws.

USDA Stealing the Term ‘Grass Fed’

Action Item, News, Commentary — walterj 4:36 am

AMS NEWS RELEASE

AMS No. 178-07
Billy Cox (202) 720-8998
billy.cox@usda.gov
Jimmie Turner (202) 720-8998
jimmie.turner@usda.gov

USDA ESTABLISHES GRASS (FORAGE) FED MARKETING CLAIM STANDARD

WASHINGTON, Oct. 15, 2007 — The U.S. Department of Agriculture today issued a voluntary standard for grass
(forage) fed marketing claims. The standard will be published as a Notice in the Federal Register and is titled the U.S.
Standard for Livestock and Meat Marketing Claim, Grass (Forage) Fed Claim for Ruminant Livestock and the Meat
Products Derived from Such Livestock. …
-USDA Press Release

Wonderful. Once again the USDA is out to subvert the meaning of our language and hand over the food market to big corporate interests. They are going to take over the term grass fed just like they took over the term organic so that big business can benefit and those of use who have been doing it for years will be shoved out the back door.

On the face of it it looks like they’re going to be helpful and define grass fed so that the term isn’t abused by corps that aren’t actually doing grass feeding to their livestock. The reality is that once they have control they’ll change, dilute and pollute the term by letting animals kept in confinement operations but fed a partial grass diet be defined as grass fed so as to further confuse consumers and steal away the remaining minimal portion of the market that small farmers have.

Voluntary will become mandatory. Soon you will not be able to use the term grass fed unless you signup with the USDA and pay them their bribe price. The fees will be set high enough to exclude the vast majority of small farmers who are already practicing pastured grass fed raising of livestock.

It started this way with organic standards. Then they locked out those of us who really do organic. Then they allowed non-organic practices to be used by Big Ag but still be labeled certified ‘USDA Certified Organic’.

This is about big monied lobbyists manipulating regulations, laws and definitions to benefit their corporate masters so they can corner the market and force out the competition from small farmers.

One more way our government ‘helps’ us. Anything to do with the government is not voluntary for long. Eventually the busy bodies mandate it because they ‘know what is best for you’. The last thing we need is more government regulation. I strongly suggest everyone check out a truly voluntary, farmer based, program for Certified Naturally Grown at http://NaturallyGrown.org

The solution is for consumers to buy locally from farmers they know and trust. But there’s no money in that for the high paid lobbyists and big corporations. Note that the USDA spends billions of dollars subsidizing Big Ag but only a few million dollars promoting local small farm to consumer programs like “Community Food Projects” which has been cut from the recent farm bill. Given that the “Community Food Projects” is a $5 million item and the federal budget is $2,387 billion this is like the a miser worrying over the loss of 0.0002 cents. That’s 1.6 cents for every man, woman and child. Yet at the same time they’re worrying about a dropping a penny to the poor they’re giving away nearly $13 billion of subsidies to Big Ag.

It’s time to end farm subsidies and stop having Nanny state government micro-manage our lives.

… The standard will be published in the Oct. 16, 2007, Federal Register. Copies of the proposal and more information are available by accessing the Web site at
http://www.ams.usda.gov/lsg/stand/claim.htm; from Martin E. O’Connor, AMS Livestock and Seed Programs, Room 2607–S, 1400 Independence Avenue, S.W.,
Washington, D.C. 20250-0254; or by calling (202) 720-4486.
-USDA Press Release

October 13, 2007

USDA New NAIS Strategy

Commentary — walterj 9:05 am

During the course of 2006 the USDA increasingly backed off from its plan for a “mandatory” NAIS, finally announcing in November 2006 that the federal program would remain “voluntary.” But at the same time the USDA was encouraging the states to use all means necessary to bring more participants into the USDA’s premises ID database, the National Premises Information Repository maintained at the USDA/Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) facility at Fort Collins, Colorado. The USDA also began prompting states to move on toward the second phase of NAIS, individual animal identification, which involves the electronic tagging or microchipping of nearly all individual animals with a nationally unique “Animal Identification Number” (AIN).

The tactics recommended by the USDA and/or adopted by some state agriculture departments were, in the view of many farmers and animal owners, aggressive or even relentless; often deceptive; and sometimes coercive. For example, to meet USDA quotas (required as a condition of USDA grants to the states) for numbers of premises registered, the states of New York and Pennsylvania datamined their own state-level farm program records, dumped these state records into the USDA/APHIS National Premises Information Repository, and got premises ID numbers assigned to the farms, all with no awareness on the part of the farmers that the states were signing them up for this so-called “voluntary program.” When some farmers in New York demanded a way out of the program, the New York Department of Agriculture ? Markets sent the farmers a letter containing a form with a box to check if the farmers wished to “decline to participate” in NAIS. The letter also discouraged such “non-participation,” stating that “non-participation” would “degrade[]” the system and cause “increased risk” to other “livestock operations.” Many New York farmers misunderstood the complicated letter and form, and thought returning the form would be an “opt in” to NAIS (understandable, since the government was proclaiming loudly and often that the program was “voluntary” and had not informed farmers that the state itself had already surrendered their farm information to the federal National Premises Information Repository). Because New York farmers presumed filling out the form would get them into NAIS (when actually the state had already put them in, and the form was necessary to get out), an undetermined number of farmers who would have wished to “opt out” nonetheless did not return the form. Even those farmers who did understand the Ag ? Markets letter well enough to submit the “opt out” form still were not taken out of NAIS by Ag ? Markets. Instead, Ag ? Markets sent them another letter warning of the consequences of a “catastrophic animal health event” and urging the farmers not to “opt out” of NAIS. This second Ag ? Markets letter included yet another form that the farmers had to submit to “decline to participate” in NAIS.

Another tactic used by some states during 2007 to meet premises ID quotas involved requiring children to place their parents’ farms into the USDA premises ID database if the children wished to show animals at a fair or to participate in extracurricular activities sponsored by 4-H or Future Farmers of America. This use of children to compel reluctant property owners into NAIS backfired badly in Colorado where, after some children and their animals were excluded from the state fairgrounds for lack of a premises ID, angry parents forced the reconsideration of a state-fair premises ID requirement for 2008, and also forced 4-H and FFA to rescind a requirement for premises ID for participating children. (“Extension Office Drops Premise ID equirement,” The Pueblo Chieftain, Oct. 3, 2007; “Legislation Takes Aim at State Fair Dispute,” Rocky Mountain News, Aug. 30, 2007.)

These considerable difficulties in implementing the first NAIS component, premises ID, have not deterred the USDA from moving forward with the even more controversial second component, individual animal identification. While animal owners object to premises ID as an unprecedented compilation of a federal database on citizens merely because they engage in an innocent and commonplace activity (animal ownership), the animal ID component raises even more profound objections based on religious commitments to oppose systems of secular control over Creation, and based on philosophical, social and political opposition to NAIS’s wholesale adoption and promotion of the industrial confinement-farming view of sentient creatures as mere “production units.” Animal ID, due to the USDA’s requirements for radio-frequency identification (RFID) external tags or implanted microchips and due to the fact that what is being tracked and recorded is the owner’s actions involving the animals, raises the same privacy and civil-liberties concerns as the use of those devices in the context of passports and other personal identification documents, the coercive use of microchipping as a condition of employment, or the use of these tracking devices for the developmentally disabled, Alzheimer’s patients, military personnel, or others whose free choice in the matter is impaired. (See, e.g., “Ethical Questions Raised Over Implantable Chips,” National Public Radio, All Things Considered, Nov. 12, 2005; “VeriChip Off the Old Block,” Smartmoney.com, June 2, 2006.)

These privacy and civil-liberties concerns are heightened by the fact that a major manufacturer of RFID devices and microchips for animals, Digital Angel Corp., is related, through their common parent corporation Applied Digital Solutions, Inc., to the principal manufacturer of such devices for people, VeriChip Corp. An expansion of the mandatory use of these devices in animals thus will provide revenues to accelerate the advertising and promotion of RFID and microchipping for human applications. This relationship of NAIS to privacy and civil-liberties concerns raised by the uncontrolled technological development of tracking devices is the more troubling because it arises in the context of a government initiative – a relentlessly pursued government initiative – to create enormous new government-owned and/or government-accessible databases of all real property locations where food animals and other livestock are held, of all the animals themselves, and of all their owners’ transactions or physical movements involving the animals. A model system is already well underway to track and monitor the movements of horses and horse owners. Numerous states have agreed to accept a “horse passport” as a government-approved document for traveling across state lines with horses. The owner of the horse would be required to keep a log of all movements and travels with the horse for the effective period, usually 1 year, of the horse passport. The owner’s log would have to be turned in to the state veterinarian of the issuing state at the expiration of the “horse passport.” Renewal of the passport would start the clock for the keeping of a new owner’s log, which in turn would have to be submitted to the authorities at the next expiration date. (Karen Nowak, “Impact of the ESWG [NAIS Equine Species Working Group] Recommendations on Horse Owners,” Mar. 2007, revised Oct. 2007, p. 2.)

Despite the many foregoing objections and questions, the USDA has worked with the State of Michigan to impose a statewide requirement of NAIS individual animal ID for all cattle. The Michigan Department of Agriculture (MDA) has mandated, effective March 1, 2007, that all cattle must be marked with an RFID tag before being moved from their premises of origin. There has been significant objection to this requirement by Michigan farmers, and many devout Christians who are opposed to it on religious grounds, such as the Amish, already have abandoned cattle farming in Michigan because of the RFID requirement. Members of the Michigan legislature have voiced considerable disapproval of the MDA’s program but to date, have taken no effective action. (“Farmers Say No to Animal Tags,” BusinessWeek.com, Dec. 19, 2006; “Battle Over Cattle Tags,” Kalamazoo Gazette, Aug. 19, 2007.) The Michigan program is a very significant step in the development of NAIS not only because it moves from premises ID squarely into the realm of individual animal ID, but also because it signals the USDA’s and states’ transition from a frank reliance on international trade as the motive for NAIS, to a public-relations and legal tactic of couching the motive in terms of “disease control” or eradication.

Indeed, the forces promoting NAIS had begun using the “disease” rationale in 2006, but at that time it did not prove successful. For example, according to farmers who attended the Vermont hearings on mandatory premises ID in the summer of 2006, Vermont’s then Commissioner of Agriculture, Steve Kerr, threatened that substantial numbers of Vermonters could die from “avian flu” if his agency were not given a mandatory premises ID regulation. As the media-driven “avian flu” panic quickly subsided in 2006, the Kerr rationale was perceived as a somewhat desperate gambit to force premises ID on an unwilling public and it failed, with the Vermont mandatory premises rules finally withdrawn from consideration by late summer 2006. The Vermont 2006 failure of the “disease” gambit, however, did not cause the abandonment of that tactic by the USDA and the states, but rather, motivated its refinement and enhancement as a tool for a new way to impose NAIS on an unsuspecting and unwitting public.

The new way depends upon the USDA’s existing authority in many animal disease programs. After the lack of success in 2006 in implementing NAIS through normal channels of legislation or rulemaking, during 2007 the USDA has taken numerous subtle steps to prepare for imposing NAIS through those existing programs. The lynch-pin of the new NAIS was the USDA’s adoption as a final rule, on July 18, 2007, of an interim rule, first published in November 2004, which authorizes the use of NAIS premises IDs (PINs) and animal identification numbers (AINs) in the USD’s existing tuberculosis, brucellosis, scrapie, and Johne’s disease programs. (It should be noted that none of the foregoing diseases in animals is presently a significant threat to human health in the United States. For example, tuberculosis in people in the U.S. today is spread by human-to-human means, not typically by contact with animals; brucellosis in humans is very rare in the U.S. (www.cdc.gov/ncidod/dbmd/diseaseinfo/brucellosis_g.htm#howcommon); and there is no evidence that scrapie is transmissible to humans. Indeed, today these are not particularly significant as livestock diseases in the United States, occurring only in isolated geographical areas and only very occasionally.)

The significance of the July 2007 final rule on livestock numbering systems for the USDA’s new NAIS strategy cannot be overstated. Doreen Hannes, a prominent leader of the NAIS opposition in Missouri, has noted that the ultimate result of the final rule will be that nearly all animal movements will trigger mandatory NAIS identification. From the USDA’s subsequent publications and actions, we can see that the agency is using the rule to impose mandatory use of NAIS premises ID and animal ID even in routine surveillance programs, such as instances where animal owners test their livestock voluntarily in low-risk environments. Although the final rule does not specifically “require” the use of NAIS in existing disease programs, the rule in the USDA’s view permits the agency to use NAIS in the disease programs at its own discretion and without informing animal owners in advance that they are being put into the NAIS system. Each of the disease programs covered by the rule has previously operated under a numbering program independent of NAIS, with no apparent problems. Nonetheless, the final rule contemplates phasing out the prior numbering systems and, at some unspecified point, using only NAIS IDs in the disease programs. (72 F.R. 39301, 39302.) Thus, in effect, the existing disease programs will become an extensive underground system of forcing animal owners into NAIS participation without their prior knowledge, quite similar to the way that New York and Pennsylvania have assigned NAIS premises IDs to animal owners without their prior knowledge or consent.

The procedure used for adopting this final rule was out of the ordinary and resulted in an avoidance of the normal and more transparent routine procedures. Under the Administrative Procedure Act, an agency can pursue either normal rulemaking or a process often referred to as “interim” rulemaking. See 5 U.S.C. ? 553. “Normal” rulemaking entails publishing a proposed rule in the Federal Register, allowing a period for submission of public comments, and agency consideration of relevant issues raised by the comments, before a rule can go into effect. 5 U.S.C. ?? 553(b), (c). In contrast, an “interim” rule goes into effect immediately and is only supposed to be used in special circumstances where the usual notice-and-comment requirements would be “impractical, unnecessary, or contrary to the public interest;” or in instances where the rule is a minor “interpretive” statement, essentially cosmetic and insignificant. 5 U.S.C. ? 553(b). The public can submit comments after an interim rule goes into effect and before it becomes “final,” but obviously the opportunity for public opposition to stop a rule from being put into effect is much reduced when the “interim” rule process is used. Although the USDA chose to employ the unusual “interim” rule process in this instance, it is questionable whether the livestock-numbering interim rule in fact met the statutory criteria for a valid exception to the normal notice-and-comment rulemaking procedure.

The USDA’s timing concerning publication of the interim and final livestock-numbering rules is also somewhat out of the ordinary. The original “interim” rule was published and effective on November 8, 2004. NAIS did not come to the widespread attention of animal owners until late April 2005, when the USDA published a “Draft Strategic Plan” laying out the details of the program. In other words, the November 2004 interim rule purported to permit a “numbering” system, NAIS, whose significance was entirely opaque to the affected citizens – farmers, ranchers, animal owners. Not until six months later did the USDA release any information (in the form of the Draft Strategic Plan and related documents) that would permit anyone other than an “insider” to see the true meaning of the interim rule. Indeed, the comment period for the interim rule ended on January 7, 2005, nearly 4 months before the general public had any exposure to NAIS through the Draft Strategic Plan. And in fact, the USDA received only 16 timely comments on the interim rule, many from organizations involved in the development of NAIS; even at that, most of these comments expressed grave reservations about NAIS, but none of these reservations was considered by the USDA upon its adoption of the rule as final. (In contrast, we may note that the publication of the 2005 Draft Strategic Plan, which did not even rise to the level of a rulemaking proceeding, drew 624 comments, overwhelmingly negative.) Even more peculiar, perhaps, is the fact that USDA/APHIS waited over 2-1/2 years before making its interim rule final. Was the USDA perhaps waiting until the furor over NAIS died down because it did not want too much attention to the implications of making the rule final? Because, as we shall see, the main implication of the final rule is that, while the USDA calms citizen resistance by loudly proclaiming that NAIS is “voluntary,” the final rule in fact makes NAIS “mandatory” for vast numbers of animal owners.

Just two weeks after publication of the final rule, two back-to-back USDA announcements on August 1 and 2, 2007 revealed, albeit through a glass darkly, agency actions designed to switch NAIS implementation into the existing disease programs — all without any overt mention of NAIS. First, on August 1, the USDA announced the availability of “$35 million in emergency funding … for the bovine tuberculosis eradication program.” (USDA News Release 0207.07, Aug. 1, 2007.) This number bears an eerie resemblance to the NAIS funding amounts for fiscal years 2006 and 2007, i.e., over $33 million each year. There had been indications that Congress might not authorize specific NAIS funding for 2008. (See Philip Brasher, “Animal ID Program Loses Steam,” Des Moines Register, Oct. 7, 2007.) Of course, if the USDA effectively could implement NAIS through switching funding to “tuberculosis eradication” measures, the lack of NAIS funding from Congress might not matter. Indeed, this scenario might even present a valuable opportunity for members of Congress to pretend to small-farmer constituents that they had “stopped” NAIS funding, while at the same time pleasing big agri-industry NAIS proponents by allowing the program to be continued surreptitiously under the rubric of “tuberculosis eradication.” The new USDA NAIS tactics also neatly render impotent any citizen grassroots efforts to impede NAIS by urging Congress to reject NAIS enabling legislation or remove NAIS funding. If the USDA is now implementing NAIS through existing disease programs, the agency will purport to rely on the existing enabling legislation for the disease programs, and will be using funding from the disease programs.

On August 2, 2007, the USDA released a solicitation for bids for contracts to manufacture 1.5 million NAIS-compliant RFID ear tags. (USDA/APHIS Presolicitation Notice, Solicitation No. AG-32KW-S-07-0030, Aug. 2, 2007.) As memorialized in a press release issued three weeks later, on August 23, 2007, these RFID tags “will be used to uniquely identify U.S. livestock that are part of current animal disease programs, in particular within geographic regions where bovine tuberculosis testing and the brucellosis calfhood vaccination program are most active.” (APHIS News Release, (www.aphis.usda.gov/newsroom/content/2007/08/NAIS_eartags.shtml.) Having in place the final rule allowing the use of NAIS in existing disease programs, the USDA, by ordering the 1.5 million cattle RFID tags for use in existing tuberculosis and brucellosis programs, was signaling that it would quickly move to implement NAIS through these programs, and quickly move to impose the controversial electronic individual animal identification phase of NAIS.

In late August of each year, NAIS proponents gather for an “ID Expo” conference sponsored by the National Institute for Animal Agriculture (NIAA), a trade group for big livestock industry players and the manufacturers of high-technology identification and tracking equipment and systems. At the 2007 ID Expo, held from August 28 through 30 in Kansas City, the parameters of the new NAIS promotion were clear: talk about “traceability” and mention NAIS only secondarily, if at all; talk about “animal disease” and downplay the role of global trade as the motive for NAIS; and concentrate on implementing NAIS through the existing tuberculosis and brucellosis testing programs for cattle, as well as through requiring NAIS premises ID and individual animal ID for issuance of USDA/APHIS interstate shipping permits, commonly called CVIs (Certificates of Veterinarian Inspection). For example, USDA Undersecretary Bruce Knight, in a talk given on August 30, emphasized building on current ID uses in existing programs. He stressed that NAIS is moving on to individual animal ID. And while he dwelled on tales of disease events from the past, he could not help mentioning what NAIS is really about: global trade. Knight emphasized that “NAIS individual animal ID is … a valuable tool … to harmonize our own trade requirements … to make sure we are fully OIE compliant” — that is, compliant with global trade rules promulgated by the former Office International des Epizooties, now known as the World Animal Health Organization. (NIAA Newsletter, fall 2007, p. 1.)

Also appearing at the ID Expo was longtime USDA/APHIS NAIS coordinator Neil Hammerschmidt. Hammerschmidt, also speaking on August 30, discussed a forthcoming new “Business Plan” that will set priorities for NAIS. Hammerschmidt made clear that NAIS is poised to move aggressively into its second phase: “Premises registration alone will not get the job done … [Individual] animal identification is progressing.” (NIAA Newsletter, fall 2007, p. 7.) Perhaps Hammerschmidt is unaware that in Indiana and Wisconsin, states with considerable numbers of Amish farmers who have serious religious objections to NAIS as a whole and particularly to the RFID/microchip identification of individual animals, state NAIS officials have assured the Amish, in order to try to get them to accept premises ID, that NAIS entails premises ID only, with no plans for individual animal ID.

Another USDA/APHIS NAIS program coordinator, Dr. John Wiemers, explained that one current NAIS tactic is the “harmonization of animal identification systems,” including breed association and performance-recording programs. Translated, that means such private organizations as the Holstein Association, American Jersey Cattle Association, and Dairy Herd Improvement Association, all NAIS promoters from the outset, will be requiring NAIS premises ID and individual animal
ID as part of registering animals and compiling production records. Another strategy that is an “immediate priority” is integration of NAIS with existing disease programs. Wiemers made clear that all such programs will in the near future require NAIS premises ID and individual animal ID. Moreover, USDA/APHIS plans to end all former, non-NAIS numbering systems by setting a sunset date when all disease programs must stop using their former numbering systems, and must start using only NAIS numbers. All these strategies are now targeted primarily at the cattle industry, because cattle are a “high priority” for the new NAIS. (NIAA Newsletter, fall 2007, p. 7.)

The USDA/APHIS new NAIS as showcased at the ID Expo is also memorialized in a four-page agency publication called “Advancing Animal Disease Traceability.” (http://animalid.aphis.usda.gov/nais/naislibrary/documents/plans_reports/tra ceability_overview.pdf) Practicing the new NAIS public-relations approach, this “Traceability” document, while all about NAIS, does not specifically mention NAIS until nearly halfway into the document, at the bottom of page 2. This NAIS-Traceability document, in its own opaque way, tells us that USDA/APHIS is going to make NAIS premises ID and animal ID mandatory in all existing disease programs and for the issuance of CVIs: “Advancing traceability requires the integration of NAIS data standards across all disease programs … USDA will take steps to adopt and apply NAIS data standards to existing disease programs, including international/interstate commerce regulations.” (Id., p. 3.) As USDA/APHIS moves forward with individual animal ID, “the beef and dairy breeding herds are the highest priority.” (Id.) The particular strategy of mandating NAIS in cattle tuberculosis and brucellosis programs is also made clear in a USDA/APHIS “Veterinarian Information” NAIS fact sheet for practicing APHIS-accredited veterinarians (the only veterinarians qualified to do program disease testing and to issue CVIs): “Brucellosis and tuberculosis programs in some states are already or soon will be using [NAIS] animal identification numbers (AINs).”

Just about a month after the ID Expo, on September 24, 2007, USDA/APHIS announced the first award of a contract for the production of the NAIS RFID cattle tags that had been specified in the 1.5 million RFID-tag APHIS bid solicitation of August 2, 2007. (See discussion of the bid solicitation above, p. 6.) The September 24, 2007 award notice tells us that USDA/APHIS has made a contract with Global Animal Management, Inc., in the amount of $546,000, for the provision of 420,000 NAIS-compliant RFID tags for cattle. (USDA/APHIS Award Notice, Contract Award No. AG-32KW-P-07-0541, Award Date Sept. 24, 2007.)

All of which brings us back full circle onto the trail of Dr. Bob Hillman and his Texas Animal Health Commission. Also on September 24, 2007, the TAHC issued a press release entitled “Texas Animal Health Officials Tackle Tuberculosis Entry and ID Requirements.” Even though Texas presently is free of bovine tuberculosis, on the basis of isolated instances over the past few years of cattle reacting positive on TB tests in a few other states, the TAHC is ramping up a program of individual animal ID, supposedly as a means of TB monitoring. We are told in the press release that the TAHC has already adopted new cattle “movement” regulations, and that they will go into effect on October 13, 2007. We are not told in the press release why no similar media announcement was made before the actual adoption of the rules. We are not told whether the rules followed a normal notice-and-public-comment process – if so, it would appear odd that none of the substantial number of Texas livestock owners who stopped mandatory NAIS premises ID in 2006 seem to have noticed the implications of these rules. Perhaps these rules were adopted by some Texas process analogous to the USDA/APHIS adoption of NAIS for existing disease programs by “interim” rule. But the press release does not address the procedure behind the new Texas rules.

The new Texas rules are directed primarily at dairy cattle and require “official” individual animal ID and a CVI for sexually-intact dairy cattle entering Texas. The rules further require “[individually] identifying all Texas dairy cattle regardless of age – with an official or TAHC-approved identification device prior to movement within the state.”

As to why primarily dairy animals have been targeted by the new rules, Dr. Bob Hillman “explained that dairy animals are managed in close confinement and, therefore, are at greater risk for TB exposure if they have an infected herd mate.” The problem, however, with this rationale is its manifest untruth, on at least two grounds. First, dairy cattle are not necessarily kept in confinement. Many dairy herds are grazed on pasture and in that sense managed similarly to small beef herds. Second, the TAHC press release elsewhere notes that TB in free-ranging deer is a contributing factor to TB occurrences in livestock. Even if all dairy herds were totally confined as Dr. Hillman seems to assume (and in fact they are not), confinement would remove the possibility of infection from wild deer and therefore would seem to make TB less of a danger in dairy cattle than in beef cattle.

Beef producers are some of the most ardent opponents of NAIS; in contrast, many dairy producers have not resisted NAIS even if they may be opposed to it in principal. The difference is primarily cultural. Dairy farmers are already subject to a considerable burden of government regulation and testing of their on-farm procedures of milking and milk storage. They are also notoriously overworked. Thus, when told by state officials that they either are required to register for NAIS premises ID (e.g., in Wisconsin), or that their premises ID has already been “assigned” in a so-called “voluntary” program (e.g., in New York and Pennsylvania), dairy farmers have tended to ignore or fail to understand the implications of the NAIS program they are being compelled to join. Beef producers, on the other hand, have been the most vocal and committed NAIS opponents, primarily through their trade organization, the Rancher’s and Cattlemen’s Legal Action Fund, or R-CALF USA. Targeting beef cattle producers in Texas with a new NAIS individual animal ID requirement under the guise of “tuberculosis control” (a disease program that has been implemented successfully for decades on the basis of inexpensive metal eartags and its own numbering system) would be likely to provoke a sagebrush rebellion.

Of course, we do not know for certain from the TAHC press release whether the new Texas dairy cattle individual ID program is intended to dovetail with the USDA/APHIS new NAIS strategy of mandatory NAIS premises ID and animal ID in existing disease programs, and especially in existing cattle brucellosis and tuberculosis programs. The press release says only that dairy cattle will need an “official or TAHC-approved identification device.” The release does not tell us that these approved or official devices would necessarily be NAIS-compliant RFID eartags. This does, however, bring us to another unusual congruence. The TAHC news release occurred on the same day as the USDA’s announcement that it had contracted for the provision of 420,000 NAIS-compliant RFID eartags. According to the National Agricultural Statistics Service, for the period of 2000 through 2006, the average Texas dairy cattle population was approximately 437,000 head of adult cows and replacement heifers.

Now, unusual correspondences in dates and numbers may not be complete proof. But they should be enough to prompt all those Texas citizens who stopped NAIS in 2006, and certainly all Texas cattlemen, to start asking for whom the cowbell tolls.

Mary-Louise Zanoni
P.O. Box 501
Canton, NY 13617
315-386-3199
mlz@slic.com

Copyright 2007 Mary-Louise Zanoni. All rights reserved. Please contact the author to request permission to reprint or republish.
Via: Word Press. VON. Theme: W. Jeffries. Sponsors: BlackLightning, Holly’s Portraits ? Sugar Mountain Farm.